The DOI matches its Crossref record; 286 of the 288 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 303 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior
Open accessAbstract
Gambling disorder is an impairing condition confounded by psychiatric co-morbidity, particularly with substance use and anxiety disorders. Yet, our knowledge of the mechanisms that cause these disorders to coalesce remains limited. The Incentive Sensitization Theory suggests that sensitization of neural “wanting” pathways, which attribute incentive salience to rewards and their cues, is responsible for the excessive desire for drugs and cue-triggered craving. The resulting hyper-reactivity of the “wanting’ system is believed to heavily influence compulsive drug use and relapse. Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse. Together, this evidence highlights a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization, whereby sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling behaviors enhance the sensitivity and dopaminergic response to any of those stimuli. Here, we review the literature on how cue attraction and reward uncertainty may underlie gambling pathology, and examine how this framework may advance our understanding of co-mordidity with substance-use disorders (e.g., alcohol, nicotine) and anxiety disorders. We argue that reward uncertainty, as seen in slot machines and games of chance, increases dopaminergic activity in the mesolimbic pathway and enhances the incentive value of reward cues. We propose that incentive sensitization by reward uncertainty may interact with and predispose individuals to drug abuse and stress, creating a mechanism through which co-mordidity of these disorders may emerge.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review proposes an incentive sensitization/cross-sensitization framework in which reward uncertainty, drugs of abuse, and stress/anxiety each sensitize mesolimbic dopamine “wanting” pathways, helping explain comorbidity among disordered gambling, substance use, and anxiety. It argues that gambling cues and uncertain rewards become motivational magnets that can bidirectionally exacerbate drug use and stress-related pathology.
Key findings
- Gambling disorder is common and impairing: gambling affects nearly 1.8 billion individuals worldwide, 85% of U.S. adults gamble in their lifetime, and average GD prevalence is approximately 2.3%, with subclinical gambling estimated at approximately 12%.
- Comorbidity is high: meta-analytic estimates in subthreshold/clinical gamblers are 28.1% for alcohol use disorders (range 9.9%–73.2%) and 60.1% for nicotine dependence (range 34.9%–76.3%), versus general-population rates of 8.5% and 12.8%, respectively; approximately 37% of subthreshold/clinical gamblers have an anxiety disorder (range 14.0%–60.3%) versus 11.10% 12-month prevalence for any anxiety disorder in the general U.S. population.
- Reward uncertainty is proposed to sensitize dopaminergic systems and enhance incentive salience: uncertain reward cues can become more “wanted” even when they predict reward only 50% of the time, and animal studies show uncertainty exposure increases amphetamine response, amphetamine self-administration, and risky decision-making.
- Cross-sensitization is central: sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling is argued to amplify dopaminergic and motivational responses to the others, with long-lasting neuroadaptations that may explain persistent craving and relapse; treatment outcomes are poor, with only 50% abstinent at 6 months, 29% at 1 year, and 15% at 2 years, and only 8% abstinent after 1 year in Gamblers Anonymous.
Methods
- Narrative literature review synthesizing human and animal studies on incentive sensitization, cue reactivity, reward uncertainty, stress/anxiety, substance use, and gambling disorder.
- The paper integrates evidence across dopaminergic, behavioral, and clinical domains to propose a conceptual cross-sensitization framework for comorbidity.
- No primary data collection, systematic search strategy, or meta-analysis is reported.
Limitations
- The paper states that reported comorbidity prevalence ranges vary considerably due to differences in sample size, diagnostic assessment method, gambling/problem-gambling diagnostic criteria, and geographic location.
- The paper states that little research has examined comorbidity between gambling, substance use, and anxiety/stress-related disorders through this framework, and that further studies are needed to test acute stress effects on dopaminergic responses in gambling disorder and to clarify the direction of the gambling–stress relationship.
- Evident from the text: this is a narrative review without a systematic search or quantitative synthesis, and it relies heavily on animal models and cross-sectional or indirect human evidence for several proposed mechanisms.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
174 Not checked yet · 60 Own interpretation · 28 No basis given · 2 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Similarly, individuals with nicotine or alcohol related substance use disorders are also more likely to meet the diagnostic criteria for GD compared to the general population (Krmpotich et al., 2015; Petry et al., 2005; Rennert et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Krmpotich et al., 2015 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports pathological gambling in 27% of substance-dependent patients in treatment, compared with 3% of the general population. But the Methods specify that study participants had psychostimulant dependence; the paper does not establish this comparison specifically for people with nicotine or alcohol use disorders. Its statement about nicotine and alcohol runs in the opposite direction, reporting higher substance-dependence rates among people with pathological gambling. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Not checked yetcites Petry et al., 2005 source
- Partly supportedcites Rennert et al., 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) says gambling disorder is more prevalent among people with substance use disorders than in the general population and associates alcohol use disorder with greater gambling risk. The paper does not address nicotine-related substance use disorders, so it does not support that part of the claim. (LLM, conf=0.87)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In mice, chronic stress during adolescence has also been shown to increase alcohol preference and overall alcohol consumption in adulthood (Chester, Barrenha, Hughes, & Keuneke, 2008; Lopez, Doremus-Fitzwater, & Becker, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Chester, Barrenha, Hughes, & Keuneke, 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods describe 10 consecutive days of footshock exposure, and the Discussion reports increased alcohol intake and preference during the subsequent 30-day drinking period. However, the mice were selectively bred for high alcohol preference (HAP1); the paper cautions that the finding may be specific to them, so it does not establish the claim for mice generally. Page numbers are not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites Lopez, Doremus-Fitzwater, & Becker, 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that repeated variable stress during adolescence heightened voluntary ethanol intake in adult mice, and the Results report greater intake on several testing days. The Methods list ethanol and water intake as outcomes, but do not report a measure or analysis of alcohol preference, so that part of the claim is not directly supported. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Gambling disorder often co-occurs with psychiatric disorders, particularly substance use and anxiety disorders (el-Guebaly et al., 2006; Kessler et al., 2008; Lorains, Cowlishaw, & Thomas, 2011; Parhami, Mojtabai, Rosenthal, Afifi, & Fong, 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Comorbidity in Gambling Disorder
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The incentive sensitization theory has afforded valuable insight into the neurobiological and behavioral processes that are associated with individual vulnerability to addictive spectrum pathology, such as substance use disorders (T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993) and more recently, gambling disorder (Linnet, 2014; M. J. F. Robinson, Fischer, Ahuja, Lesser, & Maniates, 2015b; Rømer Thomsen et al.,”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993 source
- Not checked yetcites Linnet, 2014
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson, Fischer, Ahuja, Lesser, & Maniates, 2015b
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We propose that incentive sensitization by reward uncertainty may interact with and predispose individuals to drug abuse and stress, creating a mechanism through which comorbidity of these disorders may emerge.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, this evidence highlights a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization, whereby sensitization to stress, drugs, or gambling behaviors enhance the sensitivity and dopaminergic response to any of those stimuli.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, evidence for sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway has been seen across gambling and substance use, as well as anxiety and stress-related pathology, with stress playing a major role in relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high rates of comorbidity between these disorders have provided support on a broad level for an overlap in vulnerability and maintenance factors between anxiety, substance use, and gambling disorders.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Comorbidity in Gambling Disorder
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings not only support that gambling and substance use pathology may have significantly overlapping mechanisms, but also suggest that aspects of repeated gambling or substance use may actively confer risk for one another through biological, behavioral, or environmental pathways.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The onset of a comorbid anxiety or substance use disorder has been significantly associated with endorsing gambling disorder diagnostic criteria (e.g. “gambling as an escape from negative affect”), supporting the notion that coping may play a significant role in the comorbidity between anxiety, substance use, and gambling disorders (Lister, Milosevic, & Ledgerwood, 2015; Parhami et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The high incidence of substance use disorders in individuals with anxiety and stress-related disorders has been strongly associated with self-medication, suggesting that individuals with stress-related conditions may be more vulnerable to misuse substances to cope with aversive affective states (J. Robinson, Sareen, Cox, & Bolton, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites J. Robinson, Sareen, Cox, & Bolton, 2011 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Building upon these findings, a “dose-dependent” relationship has been cited between anxiety, substance use, and gambling disorders, whereby the severity of the anxiety symptomatology is positively associated with that of the substance use or gambling disorder (Desai & Potenza, 2008; Giddens, Stefanovics, Pilver, Desai, & Potenza, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Anxiety disorders, however, often precede the onset of gambling disorder or substance use disorders (Blanco et al., 2015; Kausch, Rugle, & Rowland, 2006; Kessler et al., 2008).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the more severe the baseline gambling involvement, the more likely the individual was to experience the onset of either an anxiety or substance use disorder.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Parhami et al., 2014 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Mirroring the increased prevalence of anxiety disorders amongst women in the general population (GD: M = 1.26%; F = 2.79%), females with gambling disorder report disproportionately higher rates of anxiety disorders than males (GD/PG: M = 3.94%; F = 14.53%) (Desai & Potenza, 2008; Kessler et al., 1994).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Shared diatheses between anxiety and gambling disorder may thus be particularly pertinent to female presentations.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings not only support that gambling and substance use pathology may have significantly overlapping mechanisms, but also suggest that aspects of repeated gambling or substance use may actively confer risk for one another through biological, behavioral, or environmental pathways.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For gambling disorder and substance use disorders, it appears this relationship is bi-directional, as the presence of one of either of these conditions often predicts the onset of the other (Afifi, Nicholson, Martins, & Sareen, 2016; Kessler et al., 2008).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In line with these findings, individuals with both anxiety and substance use disorders are at the highest risk to develop moderate to severe gambling behaviors, compared to those with one or neither of these disorders (el-Guebaly et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites el-Guebaly et al., 2006 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This consistently reported comorbidity between substance use disorders and gambling pathology has suggested that these syndromes may emerge from overlapping vulnerability factors, which cause them to often cohere in clinical presentations.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In fact, childhood adversity and trauma exposure (e.g., abuse, neglect) are transdiagnostically associated with the onset of psychopathology for anxiety and substance use (J. G. Green et al., 2010) as well as gambling pathology (Felsher, Derevensky, & Gupta, 2004).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Further, the presence of an anxiety disorder has been associated with more severe symptomatology in both gambling and substance use (C. L. Green, Nahhas, Scoglio, & Elman, 2017; Ledgerwood & Petry, 2006; Najavits, Meyer, Johnson, & Korn, 2011; Possemato et al., 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high incidence of substance use disorders in individuals with anxiety and stress-related disorders has been strongly associated with self-medication, suggesting that individuals with stress-related conditions may be more vulnerable to misuse substances to cope with aversive affective states (J. Robinson, Sareen, Cox, & Bolton, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Childhood adversity and trauma exposure may thus link these disorders together in comorbid presentations by triggering or sensitizing shared neurobiological vulnerability factors.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly, individuals with gambling disorder demonstrate elevated substance abuse symptoms compared to those without this condition (K.-L. Chou & Afifi, 2011; el-Guebaly et al., 2006; Parhami et al., 2014; Possemato et al., 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taken together, these findings suggest that anxiety disorders may also share vulnerability factors and mechanisms with addictive spectrum disorders.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, individuals with alcohol or nicotine related substance use disorders often present with more severe gambling behaviors and involvement (Desai & Potenza, 2008; el-Guebaly et al., 2006; J. E. Grant & Potenza, 2005; Ladd & Petry, 2003; Petry & Oncken, 2002).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Notably, gambling involvement, even at recreational levels, has been shown to predict the onset of anxiety or substance use disorders three years later (Parhami et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Parhami et al., 2014 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The onset of a comorbid anxiety or substance use disorder has been significantly associated with endorsing gambling disorder diagnostic criteria (e.g. “gambling as an escape from negative affect”), supporting the notion that coping may play a significant role in the comorbidity between anxiety, substance use, and gambling disorders (Lister, Milosevic, & Ledgerwood, 2015; Parhami et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly, individuals with anxiety disorders often report gambling to cope, providing an active pathway through which anxiety may lead to problematic gambling and alcohol use as a maladaptive emotion regulation strategy (Blaszczynski & Nower, 2002; Milosevic & Ledgerwood, 2010).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Temporal relationships between clinical gambling, substance use, and anxiety.
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, the lifetime prevalence of anxiety disorders in females with clinical gambling involvement (61.93%) is much greater than that observed for women in the general population (30%) (Blanco, Hasin, Petry, Stinson, & Grant, 2006; J. E. Grant et al., 2006; Kessler et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This dissociation between ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ supports the existence of two distinct neural pathways that can independently undergo separate forms of plasticity.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The same is believed to be true for a wide range of addictive substances including alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, barbiturates, benzodiazepines, cannabis, and phencyclidine (Di Chiara & Imperato, 1988; Wise & Bozarth, 1987).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In humans, studies show that dopamine levels are more highly correlated with subjective ratings of ‘wanting’ a reward than with pleasure ratings of that same reward (Leyton et al., 2002; Volkow et al., 2002).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similar findings suggesting blunted euphoria and response in opioid systems thought to be involved in ‘liking’ has been reported in individuals with gambling problems (Mick et al., 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mick et al., 2016 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In fact, certain highly addictive drugs such as nicotine are exceedingly ‘wanted’ despite producing little to no feelings of pleasure or euphoria (Benowitz, 1996; Isomura, Suzuki, & Murai, 2014; West, 2009), and drug self-administration can be maintained in the absence of any subjective pleasure (Fischman & Foltin, 1992).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This increased urge for the drug is due to a sensitization of the neural pathways responsible for ‘wanting’ (Ferrario & Robinson, 2007; Ferrario et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This process known as incentive sensitization renders individuals hyper-responsive to drugs and their cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Instead, the pleasure that is often derived from taking a particular drug becomes dissociated from the amount to which it is ‘wanted’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The incentive sensitization theory provides a psychological framework and a common neural currency to explain the development of substance use and gambling disorders.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mesolimbic dopamine system is thought to be responsible for generating ‘wanting’ and assigning incentive salience to rewards and their cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Beyond mesolimbic dopamine’s role in natural rewards and the self-administration of a wide range of addictive substances, recent evidence also suggests that gambling results in increases in mesolimbic and striatal dopamine release (Joutsa et al., 2012; Linnet et al., 2012; Linnet, Møller, Peterson, Gjedde, & Doudet, 2011; Zack & Poulos, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, specific individuals may be more vulnerable to addictive spectrum disorders due to a naturally heightened sensitivity to reward cues (T. E. Robinson, Yager, Cogan, & Saunders, 2014b; Yager & Robinson, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites T. E. Robinson, Yager, Cogan, & Saunders, 2014b
- Not checked yetcites Yager & Robinson, 2013 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Moreover, studies in support of the classification of gambling disorder as a “behavioral addiction” have produced robust evidence for behavioral, cognitive, and biological similarities between gambling disorder and substance use disorders (Di Nicola et al., 2015; Leeman & Potenza, 2012; 2013; Potenza, 2008; Slutske, Ellingson, Richmond-Rakerd, Zhu, & Martin, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Overlapping biopsychosocial risks factors
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, under particular circumstances such as drug addiction, ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ can be dissociated, where ‘wanting’ may even occur despite the fact that the user might not subjectively enjoy the reward itself (Berridge & Robinson, 2003; Berridge, Robinson, & Aldridge, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, following repeated exposure to drugs of abuse, which progressively increases ‘wanting’ and desire for more drug (Vezina, 2004; Vezina, Lorrain, Arnold, Austin, & Suto, 2002), individuals tend to escalate their consumption by increasing both the frequency with which drug is taken and the quantity consumed during each drug-taking episode.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This evidence supports the view that subjective pleasure does not play a necessary causal role in drug taking behavior.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Natural rewards such as food, water, and sex all share a common neural substrate.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In fact, certain highly addictive drugs such as nicotine are exceedingly ‘wanted’ despite producing little to no feelings of pleasure or euphoria (Benowitz, 1996; Isomura, Suzuki, & Murai, 2014; West, 2009), and drug self-administration can be maintained in the absence of any subjective pleasure (Fischman & Foltin, 1992).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fischman & Foltin, 1992
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, repeated drug intake does not appear to produce a sensitization of ‘liking’ (Bartlett, Hallin, Chapman, & Angrist, 1997).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bartlett, Hallin, Chapman, & Angrist, 1997 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In turn these cues can become motivational magnets that attract attention and trigger intense bouts of craving and desire to seek and take their associated drug reward (M. J. F. Robinson et al., 2013; M. J. F. Robinson, Fischer, Ahuja, Lesser, & Maniates, 2015b).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson et al., 2013
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson, Fischer, Ahuja, Lesser, & Maniates, 2015b
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These effects do not appear to be merely the result of shared environmental risk factors, as supported by the work of Petry and colleagues, which reported that alcohol use disorders were significantly related to gambling disorder even after controlling for sociodemographic variables highly associated with the risk for gambling pathology, including ethnicity, age, sex, marital status and region of”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry et al., 2005 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These cues can trigger surges in dopamine release that promote intense craving.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Together these repeated peaks of mesolimbic dopamine release lead to brain neuroadaptations, in particular, sensitization of these dopamine-related systems (T. E. Robinson & Becker, 1986; T. E. Robinson, Jurson, Bennett, & Bentgen, 1988).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For nicotine, animal studies have shown that repeated intermittent injections of nicotine typically cause sensitization or enhancement of the drug’s locomotor activating effects (L. K. Baker et al., 2013; Benwell & Balfour, 1992; Clarke & Kumar, 1983; Vezina, McGehee, & Green, 2007).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Gambling environments are robustly full of cues, such as flashing lights and sounds (Griffiths, 1993; Noseworthy & Finlay, 2009; Parke & Griffiths, 2006), and gamblers have been shown to display greater attentional bias and fixate their gaze for longer on gambling-related cues (Hudson, Olatunji, Gough, Yi, & Stewart, 2016; McGrath, Meitner, & Sears, 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, adolescent alcohol exposure amplifies the incentive value and attraction of reward-predictive cues (Hellberg, Levit, & Robinson, 2018; Madayag, Stringfield, Reissner, Boettiger, & Robinson, 2017), and does so through potentiation of dopamine signaling (Spoelder, Tsutsui, Lesscher, Vanderschuren, & Clark, 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In smokers, the presentation of smoking-related cues produces enhanced attentional bias towards those cues (Littel, Franken, & Van Strien, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Littel, Franken, & Van Strien, 2009 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In fact, greater attentional bias to drug-related cues is not only greater in individuals suffering from substance use, but can actually predict rates of relapse after treatment for numerous drugs, including for nicotine (Jane Powell, Dawkins, West, Powell, & Pickering, 2010; Waters et al., 2003) and alcohol (W. M. Cox, Hogan, Kristian, & Race, 2002; W. M. Cox, Pothos, & Hosier, 2007), suggesting”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, repeated exposure to drugs of abuse and gambling can produce intense spikes of mesolimbic dopamine release.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In humans, several reports have provided evidence of sensitization in psychostimulant drug users leading to enhanced drug-seeking, despite showing tolerance to the drug’s euphoric effects (Bartlett et al., 1997; Reed et al., 2009; Small et al., 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Sensitization of mesolimbic dopamine function results in the amplification of the neural mechanisms for incentive salience that transform ordinary levels of cue-triggered ‘wanting’ into excessive levels of urges to take drugs and gamble, and a persistent vulnerability to relapse (Boileau et al., 2014; W. Y. Kim, Cho, Kwak, & Kim, 2017; Leyton, 2007).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Yet, sensitization does not increase ‘liking’ reactions that reflect the hedonic impact of the reward when it actually arrives (Bartlett et al., 1997).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bartlett et al., 1997 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“More recently, these behavioral indices of greater attentional bias and incentive salience attributed to drug cues have also been shown to possess several neural correlates that also predict relapse (Janes et al., 2010; Marhe, Luijten, van de Wetering, Smits, & Franken, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Sensitization caused by repeated drug use has been observed with many drugs of abuse, including alcohol and nicotine (Benwell & Balfour, 1992; Cadoni & Di Chiara, 2000; Govind, Vezina, & Green, 2009; Laviolette & van der Kooy, 2004).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This incentive sensitization also produces hyperreactivity of the mesolimbic dopaminergic system in response to reward-related cues, resulting in heightened, intense bouts of cue-induced craving.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The cues in the gambling environment in and of themselves have demonstrated the ability to elicit craving and induce urges to gamble (Kushner et al., 2008; Park et al., 2015; Potenza et al., 2003; Wulfert, Maxson, & Jardin, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, cues that predict reward with a large degree of uncertainty are also more likely to acquire incentive salience.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The effects of uncertainty also parallel those robustly observed during amphetamine sensitization, suggesting that uncertainty may sensitize craving and reward-seeking comparable to drugs of abuse (M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Suchomel, & Berridge, 2015a).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Suchomel, & Berridge, 2015a
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings regarding uncertainty are paradoxical since they contradict the idea that the motivational value of a cue should be monotonically related to its predictive value.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, studies in rats suggest that uncertainty pertaining to the probability and magnitude of the reward outcome can cause attribution of additional incentive salience to reward-related cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, individuals with gambling pathology show elevated craving, urges to gamble, physiological, and neurological reactivity to cues associated with gambling (Goudriaan, Yucel, & van Holst, 2014; van Holst et al., 2012; Wulfert et al., 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and with self-reported levels of excitement during a gambling task (Linnet et al., 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Linnet et al., 2011 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Various studies support that cue reactivity is heightened amongst individuals with problematic gambling and gambling behavior (Hønsi, Mentzoni, Molde, & Pallesen, 2012; Thalemann, Wölfling, & Grüsser, 2007; Wulfert et al., 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Studies have correlated striatal dopamine release in problem gamblers with severity of problem gambling (Joutsa et al., 2012)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Joutsa et al., 2012 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Research has also found that problem gamblers have a sensitized dopaminergic response to gambling-related cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Additionally, a study by Clark and colleagues found that near-misses (or almost winning) in a slot machine gambling task, recruited areas of the brain that respond to wins.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites L. Clark, Lawrence, Astley-Jones, & Gray, 2009 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is thought that reward uncertainty, like drugs of abuse, may also sensitize neural systems to rewards and reward-related cues (Anselme & Robinson, 2013; Anselme, Robinson, & Berridge, 2013; Berridge, 2007; Mascia et al., 2018; M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Fischer, & Berridge, 2014a; Rømer Thomsen et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Men with gambling disorder that viewed the gambling scenario showed increased activation in regions previously shown to be involved in emotional and motivational responses (Potenza et al., 2003).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Potenza et al., 2003 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This sensitized ‘wanting’ that is present in problem gamblers, might explain their willingness to persist in gambling despite the negative consequences, such as significant financial losses.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“implying that loss has come to generate motivation in problem gamblers”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Crucially, it appears that repeated exposure to reward uncertainty subsequently increases risk preference on the rGT (Zeeb, Li, Fisher, Zack, & Fletcher, 2017).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zeeb, Li, Fisher, Zack, & Fletcher, 2017 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Exposure to an uncertain rather than a certain reward schedule (where both the chances of receiving a reward and the magnitude of this reward vary) significantly increases the attention and attraction directed to the reward cue, making uncertain reward-related cues appear more ‘wanted’(Anselme et al., 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Anselme et al., 2013
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similarly, the introduction of salient cues to winning trials, to what is termed the cued rGT, results in riskier and more disadvantageous choice behavior than when exposed to the uncued task (Barrus & Winstanley, 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Barrus & Winstanley, 2016 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A study by Linnet and colleagues found that problem gamblers exhibited increased dopamine release in their ventral striatum compared to healthy controls when they lost money in a gambling task, implying that loss has come to generate motivation in problem gamblers (Linnet, Peterson, Doudet, Gjedde, & Møller, 2010).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Linnet, Peterson, Doudet, Gjedde, & Møller, 2010 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One study analyzed reports of craving in virtual casino environments and found gambling cues to increase subjective reports of craving in recreational gamblers (Park et al., 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Park et al., 2015 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, individuals playing blackjack in a gambling-like environment reported greater urges to gamble than those in a neutral context (Kushner et al., 2008; McGrath, Dorbeck, & Barrett, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kushner et al., 2008
- Not checked yetcites McGrath, Dorbeck, & Barrett, 2013 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and that this dopaminergic signal appears to promote risk-seeking behavior, as evidenced in gambling (Fiorillo, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fiorillo, 2011 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Interestingly, the effects of cue-induced craving extend beyond the physical casino environment and into the virtual gambling environment.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, it has been suggested that such contradictory reports can be explained by the absence of familiar or relevant gambling cues during laboratory testing (Leyton & Vezina, 2012)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Leyton & Vezina, 2012 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“which when present instead produce an exaggerated striatal dopamine response (T. D. L. Steeves et al., 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites T. D. L. Steeves et al., 2009 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and this pattern of reactivity was associated with enhanced activation in regions linked to mesolimbic reward processing, including the medial prefrontal, anterior and posterior cingulate, striatal and posterior insula cortex (Sinha & Li, 2007).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sinha & Li, 2007 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, the majority of this work has examined abnormalities in neural, cognitive, and behavioral reactivity towards threat cues versus neutral cues, or compared to healthy control populations (e.g. Dieterich, Endrass, & Kathmann, 2017).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dieterich, Endrass, & Kathmann, 2017 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Stress, similar to drugs of abuse, may also induce neurological changes that enhance dopaminergic activity and the attribution of incentive value to rewards and their cues (Berridge, 2012; T. E. Robinson, Angus, & Becker, 1985; Yap et al., 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In particular, one human study demonstrated that uncertain rewards, similar to threats, result in increased insula responsivity (Gorka et al., 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gorka et al., 2016 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In particular, there may be critical periods, such as during childhood, in which neural systems are particularly vulnerable to sensitization by stress (Rodrigues, Leão, Carvalho, Almeida, & Sousa, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Rodrigues, Leão, Carvalho, Almeida, & Sousa, 2011 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and support the evidence that the physiological reactivity elicited by stress cues may serve as a powerful catalyst for craving and subsequent relapse (Sinha et al., 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sinha et al., 2011 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In turn, administration of CRF, has been shown to elevate the value of Pavlovian associated reward cues (Peciña et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Peciña et al., 2006 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Specifically, stress cues significantly increased both alcohol craving and reported anxiety levels in abstinent alcohol-dependent individuals (Fox et al., 2007)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fox et al., 2007 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this evidence suggests a strong connection between reward uncertainty, gambling propensity, substance abuse and cue sensitivity.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In this vein, stress has been shown to elicit similar neuroadaptations to alcohol and nicotine, increasing the excitatory strength of dopamine neurons in midbrain (e.g., VTA, NAc) in animals (Saal, Dong, Bonci, & Malenka, 2003).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Saal, Dong, Bonci, & Malenka, 2003 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One animal study has supported this model, with high anxiety animals demonstrating particular vulnerability to attend to reward-related uncertain cues (Hellberg et al., 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hellberg et al., 2018 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These responses to stress cues were on the whole comparable to those induced by alcohol-associated cues (Fox et al., 2007; Sinha et al., 2009; Sinha & Li, 2007)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all, research suggests that cues can become powerful instigators of gambling behavior.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Interestingly, individuals with PD specifically have been shown to have particularly difficult experiences with withdrawal and high rates of relapse, due to the syndromic sensitivity to these intereoceptive arousal cues that characterize withdrawal from tobacco or other substances of abuse (Zvolensky & Bernstein, 2005; Zvolensky, Stewart, Vujanovic, Gavric, & Steeves, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting a possible pathway through which individuals suffering or predisposed to generalized anxiety disorder and exposed to high levels of uncertainty through gambling, might be inclined to abuse alcohol as a form of self-medication”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, there is evidence that stress cues similarly elicit craving by inducing anxiety (Coffey, Stasiewicz, Hughes, & Brimo, 2006; Fox, Bergquist, Hong, & Sinha, 2007; Sinha & Li, 2007; Sinha et al., 2009; 2003).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Given the uncertainty inherent to games of chance, it follows that individuals at risk for anxiety disorders, due to high levels of intolerance of uncertainty, may be particularly vulnerable to over-attend to uncertainty-related cues and subsequently becoming more motivated and intensely focused on gambling behaviors through incentive sensitization.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, games that are governed by reward uncertainty and contain a large number of cues or a high prevalence of flashing lights and sounds, such as electronic gambling machines, might be particularly capable of eliciting motivated play and sensitizing ‘wanting’ pathways in a manner that promotes excessive attentional bias and risky decision-making.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“These findings align well with the stress-sensitization hypothesis of the role of early life adversity in the onset of anxiety disorders, substance use, and gambling disorder (McLaughlin et al., 2010).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites McLaughlin et al., 2010 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These effects have been less well examined within substance use and gambling, however, the mechanism by which somatic cues elicit persistent engagement with nicotine and relapse among these individuals naturally extends to other substance and behavioral addictions.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The studies that have examined both reward and threat cue processing do suggest highly overlapping neurobiological and psychological processing abnormalities in anxiety disorders that may generally encompass the attribution of value and recruitment of attention to valenced cues, rather than just threat cues (Gorka, Nelson, Phan, & Shankman, 2016; Tanovic et al., 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In the human literature, substantial research has supported that individual differences in the sensitivity to cues may also confer risk for anxiety disorders (Bar-Haim, Lamy, Pergamin, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & van IJzendoorn, 2007; Heeren, Peschard, & Philippot, 2011; Mogg & Bradley, 2018; Shackman et al., 2016; Van Bockstaele et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“There is substantial evidence to support that stressful experiences during early development may sensitize mesolimbic dopamine signaling in neural regions, inducing permanent changes in the neural programming of dopaminergic activity (Rodrigues et al., 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Rodrigues et al., 2011 source
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In turn, attentional bias towards gambling cues has been suggested to play a critical role in the transition from recreational to problem gambling (L. D. Grant & Bowling, 2015; van Holst et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Within this line of work, uncertainty has emerged as an important moderator of this observed individual difference in sensitivity to threat cues, with individuals with anxiety disorders demonstrating enhanced reactivity to uncertain compared to certain threat cues (Bradford, Kaye, & Curtin, 2014a; Bradford, Magruder, Korhumel, & Curtin, 2014b; Grupe & Nitschke, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bradford, Kaye, & Curtin, 2014a
- Not checked yetcites Bradford, Magruder, Korhumel, & Curtin, 2014b
- Not checked yetcites Grupe & Nitschke, 2013 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Chronic and acute stress may therefore produce similar neural adaptations in the mesolimbic dopamine circuit that are responsible for increased ‘wanting’ of rewards and enhanced cue reactivity.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is also evidence to suggest that the physiological response to stress, involving elevated corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF), a hormone highly implicated in the stress response, recruits activity in dopaminergic pathways and elevates dopaminergic activity (Berridge, 2010; Cuadra, Zurita, Lacerra, & Molina, 1999; Dallman, 2010; Peciña, Schulkin, & Berridge, 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both positive and negative valenced cues in gambling, such as those associated with wins and losses, may particularly sensitize reactivity to gambling-related cues in individuals with anxiety disorders.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Recent human studies have shown that exposure to only three doses of amphetamine can cause cross-sensitization to stress, resulting in an increased cortisol response to stress and greater striatal dopamine release (Booij et al., 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Booij et al., 2016
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A study by Horger et al. found that rats given nine daily injections of amphetamine or nicotine, acquired cocaine self-administration much quicker than control animals (Casey, Benkelfat, Young, & Leyton, 2006; Horger et al., 1992; Munafò, Mannie, Cowen, Harmer, & McTavish, 2007)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is a long history of evidence suggesting that prior exposure to chronic or acute stress predisposes individuals to substance use and abuse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together these findings strongly suggest a role for stress, particularly during early life and adolescence, in sensitizing reward systems responsible for the attribution of drug and cue ‘wanting’, thus placing individuals at greater risk for substance use disorders, such as commonly observed in alcohol and nicotine dependence.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is also direct evidence for cross-sensitization of the dopaminergic system under gambling-like conditions in animals (Mascia et al., 2018; Singer et al., 2012; Zack et al., 2014; Zeeb et al., 2017).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Interestingly, in many of these patients, discontinuation of their dopaminergic medication resolved their pathological gambling (Dodd et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dodd et al., 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In a similar study, Singer and his collaborators found that rats trained to press a lever for reward on a variable schedule showed a greater locomotor response to amphetamine than those who were rewarded on a fixed schedule (Singer et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Singer et al., 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, evidence suggests that final maturation of behavior, dopamine systems, and HPA axis occurs during adolescence, suggesting that individuals experiencing stressful events during early life and adolescence are particularly prone for developing cross-sensitization to drugs of abuse (Burke & Miczek, 2014; Rodrigues et al., 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Boileau and colleagues found that problem gamblers have increased dopamine release in their dorsal striatum in response to amphetamine in comparison with healthy controls (Boileau et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Boileau et al., 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similarly, a study by Cunningham et al. found that rats who were given intra-accumbens treatment of certain opiates (such as morphine) later proved to be sensitized to the behavioral effects of amphetamine (Cunningham & Kelley, 1992).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Cunningham & Kelley, 1992 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is also evidence for cross-sensitization between drugs of abuse and gambling (Boileau et al., 2014; Mascia et al., 2018; Singer, Scott-Railton, & Vezina, 2012; Zack, Featherstone, Mathewson, & Fletcher, 2014; Zeeb et al., 2017)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting that incentive sensitization of their dopamine-stimulating medication produces cross-sensitization to several other rewards including gambling.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Zack and colleagues found that rats exposed to maximally uncertain conditions showed the greatest locomotor response to an amphetamine challenge (Zack et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zack et al., 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Uncertainty causes cross-sensitization of the dopaminergic system, as seen by increased reactivity to a single dose of amphetamine, in the same way that repeated exposure to drugs of abuse sensitizes this system.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Cross-sensitization and the resulting hyper-responsivity of dopaminergic systems also occurs between drugs of abuse and natural rewards (Avena & Hoebel, 2003)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Avena & Hoebel, 2003 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“whereas Cortright et al. found that nicotine pretreatment enhances acquisition of amphetamine self-administration particularly in the presence of nicotine-associated cues (Cortright, Sampedro, Neugebauer, & Vezina, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Cortright, Sampedro, Neugebauer, & Vezina, 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and between gambling and stress (C. L. Green et al., 2017).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites C. L. Green et al., 2017 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A study by Zago and colleagues demonstrated that the co-occurrence of repeated stress alongside chronic nicotine administration resulted in behavioral sensitization, particularly in adolescent animals (Zago et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Zago et al., 2012 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such findings are problematic when one considers that beyond the impact of stress on the initial response and consumption to drugs of abuse, stressful life events can also act as powerful triggers of drug cravings and relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“DDS occurs in a small proportion of Parkinson’s patients being treated with dopamine agonist medication (Dodd et al., 2005; Evans, Lawrence, Cresswell, Katzenschlager, & Lees, 2010; Evans et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Repeated stress during adolescence has also been shown to increase the incentive value and attraction to contexts previously paired with either nicotine or alcohol, even at lower doses (Brielmaier, McDonald, & Smith, 2012; Song et al., 2007).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most compelling evidence for neural sensitization of dopamine release and resulting cross-sensitization with gambling comes from Parkinson patients who develop dopamine dysregulation syndrome (DDS).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is also accompanied by increased dopamine release in the ventral striatum especially in the combined presence of cues and the dopamine-stimulating drug.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“and drugs of abuse and stress (at both behavioral and physiological levels) (Cruz, Marin, Leão, & Planeta, 2011; Garcia-Keller et al., 2013; Piazza et al., 1990).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, many human and animal studies have shown that exposure to acute and chronic stress following abstinence increases the likelihood of relapse to both alcohol and nicotine (Breese et al., 2005; Buczek, Lê, Wang, Stewart, & Shaham, 1999; Lê et al., 1998; Mantsch, Baker, Funk, Lê, & Shaham, 2016; Matheny & Weatherman, 1998; Perkins & Grobe, 1992).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Breese et al., 2005
- Not checked yetcites Buczek, Lê, Wang, Stewart, & Shaham, 1999 source
- Not checked yetcites Lê et al., 1998
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This heightened ‘wanting’ in response to cues in turn leads to sudden and almost uncontrollable bouts of cue-triggered craving and excessive control of behavior by reward-related cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These factors interact with individual features of the person, including genes, sex, hormonal status, etc.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“only 15% are abstinent after two years (Stinchfield & Winters, 2001)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Stinchfield & Winters, 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, these neuroadaptations are believed to persist even long after an individual has undergone recovery from substance use or gambling disorder.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taken together these results highlight a link between gambling propensity and stress”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting a strong relationship between experience of stressful events and gambling problems”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Possibly the most concerning finding regarding the impact of incentive sensitization and cross-sensitization on comorbidity between stress, drugs of abuse and gambling is that the neural changes that underlie sensitization, and thus cross-sensitization, appear to be long-lasting.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In humans, evidence suggests that exposure to only 4 doses of amphetamine produced a sensitized dopaminergic response when tested up to one year later (Boileau et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Boileau et al., 2006 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we reviewed the literature suggesting a mechanistic interplay between stress/anxiety, alcohol and nicotine use, and gambling disorder”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to note that incentive sensitization does not affect everyone equally.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The phenomenon of sensitization displays a tremendous amount of individual variation, with some individuals developing rapid and robust sensitization in contrast to others who sensitize very little, if at all.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similar to drugs of abuse, there is evidence suggesting that stress may render individuals more vulnerable to gambling behavior and associated reward cues (Biback & Zack, 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Biback & Zack, 2015 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“chronic stress also appears to place individuals at greater risk of gambling pathology.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In animals, studies using the rodent Gambling Task demonstrated that injections of corticosterone prevented animals from improving their decision-making and avoiding disadvantageous options (Koot, Baars, Hesseling, van den Bos, & Joëls, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Koot, Baars, Hesseling, van den Bos, & Joëls, 2013 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“long-term rates of abstinence are alarmingly low”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The degree of post-traumatic stress symptomatology correlated with greater gambling severity, suggesting a strong relationship between experience of stressful events and gambling problems (C. L. Green et al., 2017)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites C. L. Green et al., 2017 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Some of this can be explained by the fact that individuals differ in their patterns of drug-taking (Allain, Minogianis, Roberts, & Samaha, 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Allain, Minogianis, Roberts, & Samaha, 2015 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, while evidence appears to suggest that stress might be a direct constituent of the response to uncertainty”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a gambling setting, cues associated with gambling machines, cigarette smoking and alcohol use may work synergistically to drive motivation”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This would explain why sensitization to stress during early life and adolescence can still have an impact on reward sensitivity to drugs of abuse like nicotine and alcohol and gambling during adulthood.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Studies like these confirm that the neuroadaptations seen in the brain that underlie incentive and dopaminergic sensitization are long-lasting.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“A study by Paulson and colleagues showed that when rats were pretreated with amphetamine, they exhibited sensitization an entire year after the pretreatment was discontinued (Paulson, Camp, & Robinson, 1991).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Paulson, Camp, & Robinson, 1991 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“provided a framework to suggest that comorbidity and cue reactivity may powerfully moderate one’s vulnerability as it pertains to disordered gambling behavior.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the cross-sensitization of reward pathways caused by these factors might accelerate and worsen the pathology of gambling disorder.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Likewise, other studies have reported that mice demonstrate behavioral or psychomotor sensitization, in the form of increased locomotor activity, up to 3 months after cocaine exposure (Shuster, Yu, & Bates, 1977)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Shuster, Yu, & Bates, 1977 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is also evidence suggesting that the genetic variation in acute responsiveness to drugs is different to that responsible for differences in sensitization (Eisener-Dorman, Grabowski-Boase, & Tarantino, 2011; Phillips, Huson, & McKinnon, 1998; Phillips, Huson, Gwiazdon, Kasch, & Shen, 1995).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The direction of the relationship between gambling and stress may therefore be bidirectional, but further research is needed for it to be fully elucidated.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“with only 8% of patients remaining abstinent after one year of treatment (Petry & Armentano, 1999)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry & Armentano, 1999 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Their findings suggest that pathological gamblers displayed greater post-traumatic stress symptoms, specifically they demonstrated enhanced severity of associated physiological arousal.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites C. L. Green et al., 2017 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and highlighting enhanced physiological reactivity as a potential contributing factor to this association.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“while monkeys still display a sensitized response to amphetamine even 2 years post-treatment (Castner & Goldman-Rakic, 1999).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Castner & Goldman-Rakic, 1999 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“and up to 8 months after morphine exposure (Shuster, Webster, & Yu, 1975)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Shuster, Webster, & Yu, 1975 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 32
- It may state two separate claims as one. 57
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, gambling disorder frequently co-occurs with substance use disorders, particularly alcohol and nicotine, as well as mood and anxiety disorders (Conway, Compton, Stinson, & Grant, 2006; B. F. Grant et al., 2004b; Petry et al., 2005; Ronzitti, Kraus, Hoff, & Potenza, 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Introduction
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We argue that reward uncertainty, as seen in slot machines and games of chance, increases dopaminergic activity in the mesolimbic pathway and enhances the incentive value of reward cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Substance use disorders are one of the most frequently comorbid conditions in gambling disorder (K.-L. Chou & Afifi, 2011; Lorains et al., 2011; Walther, Morgenstern, & Hanewinkel, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A recent meta-analysis including 11 studies conducted between 1998-2010 reported an average comorbidity rate of 28.1% (range: 9.9% - 73.2%) for alcohol use disorders and 60.1% (range: 34.9% - 76.3%) for nicotine dependence in individuals with subthreshold or clinical gambling severity (Lorains et al., 2011; Petry et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“and approximately 18% of individuals with substance use disorders meet the past 12-month criteria for an anxiety (B. F. Grant et al., 2004b).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant et al., 2004b
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In particular, alcohol and nicotine are the most often misused substances among individuals with gambling pathology (Petry et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry et al., 2005 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Approximately 37% (range: 14.0% −60.3%) of subthreshold and clinical gamblers suffer from an anxiety disorder (Kessler et al., 2008; Lorains et al., 2011; Petry et al., 2005)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Though this limitation is important to acknowledge, the evidence suggests that the rates of alcohol and nicotine use disorders in individuals with gambling-related pathology largely exceed those reported in the general population (Alcohol: 8.5%; Nicotine: 12.8%) (Kessler et al., 2005).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Substance Use Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kessler et al., 2005 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, models adjusted to account for a breadth of sociodemographic vulnerability factors (i.e., age, race/ethnicity, sex, education, income, marital status, geographic region) have demonstrated that individuals with alcohol use disorders or nicotine dependence are on average at two to three times greater risk for an anxiety disorder in the past 12 months compared to individuals without”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant et al., 2004b
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant, Hasin, Chou, Stinson, & Dawson, 2004a
- Not checked yetcites Hasin, Stinson, Ogburn, & Grant, 2007 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In contrast, Grant and colleagues report a 12-month prevalence of 11.10% for any anxiety disorder in the general U.S. population (B. F. Grant et al., 2004b).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Prevalent Comorbid Conditions > Anxiety Disorders
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites B. F. Grant et al., 2004b
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“‘Wanting’ and ‘liking’ typically fluctuate in unison, where ‘liking’ a particular reward renders it commensurately ‘wanted’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The incentive sensitization theory (T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993; 2008) was initially proposed to distinguish between the different components of reward.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Often referred to as incentive salience, it is the psychological process by which rewards and the cues associated with them become imbued with subconscious motivational value and are transformed into objects of desire (M. J. F. Robinson, Robinson, & Berridge, 2013; T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993; 2008).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“‘Wanting’ represents the visceral motivation and attraction attributed to a reward and reward-related cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together this evidence suggests that dopamine may act as a common neural currency for both gambling and substance use disorder, that may be triggered when exposed to their respective cues, leading to sudden peaks in craving, and ultimately to long-lasting neural changes associated with addiction and relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Collectively, these findings suggest that there may be considerable overlap in the factors that confer risk for gambling, substance use, and anxiety disorders, as well as shared causal mechanisms and maintenance factors that cause these disorders to cohere and bidirectionally exacerbate symptom severity.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Comorbidity potentiates clinical severity.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It also indicates how the emergence and persistence of these disorders can be related to stress and anxiety.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, following repeated exposure to drugs of abuse, which progressively increases ‘wanting’ and desire for more drug (Vezina, 2004; Vezina, Lorrain, Arnold, Austin, & Suto, 2002), individuals tend to escalate their consumption by increasing both the frequency with which drug is taken and the quantity consumed during each drug-taking episode.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whereas ‘liking’ accounts for the objective hedonic and pleasurable response to rewards, the primary focus is placed on ‘wanting’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It sensitizes the incentive value attributed to drugs, but also particularly to the cues that have been associated with the drug.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While these rewards typically all generate pleasure, a vast body of evidence, in both rodents and humans, suggests that the mesolimbic system is preferentially active during exposure to rewards, with the primary consequence being the release of the neurotransmitter dopamine (Balfour, 2015a; Berridge & Robinson, 1998; Corrigall, Coen, & Adamson, 1994; Di Chiara & Imperato, 1988).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It partitioned reward into ‘liking’, ‘wanting’ and learning, with an important focus on the distinction between ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This evidence points to a possible common underlying cause for the coherence of anxiety, gambling and substance use disorders; one where the neuroadaptations associated with a history of stress and trauma might predispose certain individuals to the onset of one or more of these disorders and interact with neurobiological vulnerabilities, resulting in complex comorbid presentations with markedly”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Overlapping biopsychosocial risks factors
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The attribution of incentive salience is a psychological process mediated by mesocorticolimbic systems in the brain that help direct behavior towards naturally sought-after rewards, such as food, water and sex.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While in some cases, repeated drug use results in no change in drug ‘liking’, it can also undergo tolerance, where the hedonic response to drug tends to gradually decrease with repeated use.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Incentive Sensitization Theory > Dissociating ‘Wanting’ and ‘Liking’
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In a study examining lifetime trauma history amongst pathological gamblers found that 64% of gamblers reported a history of emotional trauma, 40.5%, physical trauma, and 24.3%, sexual trauma, with the majority of these traumatic events occurring in childhood and a history of trauma being associated with greater frequency of drug and alcohol dependence (Kausch et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The Impact of Comorbidity > Overlapping biopsychosocial risks factors
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kausch et al., 2006 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This system is comprised of dopaminergic fibers that project from the ventral tegmental area in the midbrain, to limbic and cortical structures such as the nucleus accumbens, ventral pallidum, amygdala, and prefrontal cortex (Di Chiara & Imperato, 1988; T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although it was long believed that dopamine was the neurotransmitter responsible for pleasure, this has long been disproved, and a large body of evidence suggests that it instead modulates ‘wanting’ (Berridge & Valenstein, 1991; Peciña, Cagniard, Berridge, Aldridge, & Zhuang, 2003; Tindell, Berridge, Zhang, Peciña, & Aldridge, 2005; Wyvell & Berridge, 2000).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > A common neural currency for ‘wanting’
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In humans, studies show that individuals that abuse cocaine or alcohol show abnormally high dopaminergic activity in the ventral striatum and elevated self-reported craving in response to drug-related cues (Heinz et al., 2014; Miedl, Büchel, & Peters, 2014; Volkow et al., 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly in animals, cue attraction predicts cue-induced reinstatement of nicotine self-administration, while in converse, nicotine administration enhances cue-induced approach behavior (Palmatier, Kellicut, Brianna Sheppard, Brown, & Robinson, 2014; Versaggi, King, & Meyer, 2016), an effect which is disrupted by dopamine antagonists (Palmatier et al., 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Sensitization can also be seen as a greater behavioral response to the drug or enhanced acquisition and escalation of drug self-administration, that accompany brain neural adaptations that underlie amplified ‘wanting’ for the reward (Ferrario et al., 2005; Ferrario & Robinson, 2007; Vezina, 2004; Vezina et al., 2002).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, adolescent nicotine treatment predisposes adult rats to develop increased behavioral sensitivity to chronic nicotine treatment and to be more sensitive to the initial effects of nicotine (Bracken, Chambers, Berg, Rodd, & McBride, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bracken, Chambers, Berg, Rodd, & McBride, 2011 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In fact, Franken and colleagues showed that even after 12 months of treatment individuals recovering from a substance use disorder still displayed heightened cue reactivity, and that exposure to drug cues increased feelings of craving and depression (Franken, de Haan, van der Meer, Haffmans, & Hendriks, 1999).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Franken, de Haan, van der Meer, Haffmans, & Hendriks, 1999
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“For example, in animal studies, sensitization increases neuronal firing in VTA–accumbens–pallidal pathways that code incentive salience as well as the behavioral ability of reward cues to trigger frenzied bursts of effort to obtain the reward (Peciña & Berridge, 2013; Tindell et al., 2005; Wyvell & Berridge, 2001).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and the sensitization of ‘wanting’
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In animals, recent findings have shown that repeated alcohol consumption leading to sensitization results in increased dopaminergic reactivity to alcohol (Didone, Masson, Quoilin, Seutin, & Quertemont, 2014), and greater behavioral responsivity (Hoshaw & Lewis, 2001).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Exposure to nicotine also increases its subsequent self-administration, which is further enhanced by nicotine-paired cues (Neugebauer, Cortright, Sampedro, & Vezina, 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Neugebauer, Cortright, Sampedro, & Vezina, 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Furthermore, drugs such as nicotine produce increases in dopamine transmission but fail to produce any reported ‘liking’ or euphoria in humans, suggesting the absence of any clear relationship between ‘liking’ and the excessive ‘wanting’ that leads to addiction (Balfour, 2015b; Caggiula et al., 2009; Rose, Behm, Westman, & Johnson, 2000).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly in humans, a dissociation has been found between ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ for alcohol where small doses of alcohol cause spikes in ‘wanting’ yet leave ‘liking’ unaffected (Hobbs, Remington, & Glautier, 2005; Ostafin, Marlatt, & Troop-Gordon, 2010), and heavy drinkers show higher sensitivity to alcohol’s stimulating and rewarding effects (A. C. King, Hasin, O'Connor, McNamara, & Cao, 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The same is true of alcohol, whereby alcohol-paired cues also trigger cue approach and alcohol-seeking behavior (Krank, 2003; Krank, O'Neill, Squarey, & Jacob, 2008; Srey, Maddux, & Chaudhri, 2015; Tomie & Sharma, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, greater attentional bias to drug-related cues is not only greater in individuals suffering from substance use, but can actually predict rates of relapse after treatment for numerous drugs, including for nicotine (Jane Powell, Dawkins, West, Powell, & Pickering, 2010; Waters et al., 2003) and alcohol (W. M. Cox, Hogan, Kristian, & Race, 2002; W. M. Cox, Pothos, & Hosier, 2007), suggesting”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in substance abuse
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Gambling environments are robustly full of cues, such as flashing lights and sounds (Griffiths, 1993; Noseworthy & Finlay, 2009; Parke & Griffiths, 2006), and gamblers have been shown to display greater attentional bias and fixate their gaze for longer on gambling-related cues (Hudson, Olatunji, Gough, Yi, & Stewart, 2016; McGrath, Meitner, & Sears, 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting that these stimuli also take on increased salience in human gamblers and may possess “motivational magnet” properties”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This finding implies that while gambling-related cues take on increased incentive salience, other non-related or unfamiliar cues may become less important or even inhibit motivation (Leyton, 2007; 2014; Leyton & Vezina, 2012; 2014).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Participants in this study reported that near-misses were significantly less pleasant than full misses, but triggered their urge to play more (L. Clark, Lawrence, Astley-Jones, & Gray, 2009)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites L. Clark, Lawrence, Astley-Jones, & Gray, 2009 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is worth mentioning that certain studies instead report a blunted striatal dopamine response to cues in pathological gamblers (Balodis et al., 2012; Miedl, Peters, & Büchel, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Along with evidence that in humans win-associated cues, such as jingles varying in length and size in function of win size, both increase arousal and lead subjects to overestimate their frequency of winning (Dixon et al., 2014)”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Dixon et al., 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While the majority of animals learn to choose the safe and advantageous options, a small proportion tend to be more risk-preferring, and these risk-preferring animals make more drug-seeking responses and show greater cue-induced incubation of craving after cocaine self-administration (Ferland & Winstanley, 2016).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Ferland & Winstanley, 2016 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One of the hallmarks of gambling, and indeed of most games, is the presence of uncertainty (Costikyan, 2013).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Costikyan, 2013
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Under reward uncertainty, when the cue only predicts the reward 50% of the time, the predictive value of the cue is degraded, yet these findings suggest that it is more attractive and ‘wanted’ more.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This provides further evidence for the neural and psychological dissociation of ‘liking’ and ‘wanting’ and an exacerbation of ‘wanting’ in problem gambling.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These results are consistent with the incentive salience theory, however, and highlight the dissociation that can occur between the predictive value of a cue, driven by cue learning (cue-reward association), and the attribution of cue ‘wanting’ (T. E. Robinson & Flagel, 2009; Zhang, Berridge, Tindell, Smith, & Aldridge, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“illustrating that although problem gamblers do not enjoy losses, they do find losses highly motivating.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In particular, problem gamblers appear more sensitive to bias attention towards gambling-related cues and to experience craving after exposure to gambling cues than healthy controls (Goudriaan et al., 2014; van Holst et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Goudriaan et al., 2014
- Not checked yetcites van Holst et al., 2012 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, distal cues that are on the periphery of our attention are typically ignored under certain and predictable reward conditions, but when reward conditions are unpredictable, these cues attract more attention (M. J. F. Robinson et al., 2014a).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson et al., 2014a
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Exposure to reward uncertainty even increases the proportion of individuals that ascribe incentive value to cues, and further narrows their focus on cues (Hellberg et al., 2018; M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Suchomel, & Berridge, 2015a).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > The role of uncertainty in cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hellberg et al., 2018 source
- Not checked yetcites M. J. F. Robinson, Anselme, Suchomel, & Berridge, 2015a
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Exposure to acute and chronic stressors often results in initial sensitization of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, which may then produce hypersensitivity to other stressors.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Sensitization can also affect other physiological systems (i.e. plasma catecholamines, brain monoamines), which appears to be long-lasting, a finding that may explain the long-term consequences of early-life adversity and traumatic stressors (Belda, Fuentes, Daviu, Nadal, & Armario, 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Belda, Fuentes, Daviu, Nadal, & Armario, 2015 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This seems notable, given the relationship between anxiety disorders, such as PD, and the strikingly high rates of comorbidity and prospective onset of alcohol and tobacco use disorders among these individuals (Zimmermann et al., 2003; Zvolensky, Bernstein, Marshall, & Feldner, 2006).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Intolerance to uncertainty is a transdiagnostic factor strongly implicated in the maintenance of anxiety disorders, and is associated with greater physiological reactivity, attentional biases, and neural activation to uncertainty and uncertain threat cues (Carleton, 2012; Krain et al., 2006; Mahoney & McEvoy, 2012; Nelson & Shankman, 2011; Simmons, Matthews, Paulus, & Stein, 2008).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In anxiety disorders, such as Panic Disorder (PD) or PTSD, intereoceptive and physiological sensations serve as particularly potent stress cues, and are known to elicit negative affective states, such as anxiety and even panic attacks.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Interestingly, although there are dopaminergic neurons that encode for just positive or negative motivational events, there are more numerous dopaminergic neurons that excite similarly to both threatening and rewarding events (Matsumoto & Hikosaka, 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Matsumoto & Hikosaka, 2009 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In cases of cross-sensitization of ‘wanting’, an individual, as a result of excessively consuming one drug, is rendered hyper-responsive to the motivational effects of other drugs, including ones that may have never been previously consumed.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together these studies demonstrate that repeated exposure to one drug can render individuals more susceptible to the reinforcing effects of another, and highlight the importance played by contextual cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This suggests that both alcohol and nicotine increased the incentive value and propensity to gamble but through separate processes (Barrett, Collins, & Stewart, 2015).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Barrett, Collins, & Stewart, 2015 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When experienced together, drugs such as nicotine and alcohol, stress and reward uncertainty might exert a cumulative effect on the mesolimbic reward system, a phenomenon known as cross-sensitization.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization: definition
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For example, in one study, chronically stressed animals displayed a sensitized response to the effects of acute cocaine administration, increased self-administration of cocaine, and demonstrated increased dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens (Holly, Shimamoto, DeBold, & Miczek, 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Holly, Shimamoto, DeBold, & Miczek, 2012 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Their results showed that while administration of alcohol increased cigarette craving and ‘wanting’ to consume more alcohol, it also increased the urge to gamble, whereas nicotine increased average wagers.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Barrett, Collins, & Stewart, 2015 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It typically leads to compulsive use of their dopaminergic drug medications, with increased reports of drug ‘wanting’ but not drug ‘liking’.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Using a similar approach, Mascia and her colleagues found that repeated exposure to uncertainty resulted in self-administration of more amphetamine and a greater dopaminergic response to amphetamine (Mascia et al., 2018).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mascia et al., 2018
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together these results suggest that exposure to reward uncertainty and gambling can increase sensitivity to drugs of abuse which in turn can increase the incentive value associated to gambling and its cues, and possibly promote the transition from casual recreational gambling to compulsive gambling.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Traumatic events or chronic distressed states, typical of anxiety disorders, may therefore leave individuals more susceptible to the rewarding effects of drugs and gambling and predispose individuals to over-attribute value to drugs and gambling cues.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization by stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similar findings have also been reported in humans, where adverse childhood experiences were associated with increased likelihood of alcohol use during adolescence and of alcohol abuse as an adult (Dube, Anda, Felitti, Edwards, & Croft, 2002; Dube et al., 2006; Enoch, 2011).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Crucially, it is frequently accompanied by the development of pathological gambling, hypersexuality, food bingeing and punding (a form of complex behavioral stereotypy), suggesting that incentive sensitization of their dopamine-stimulating medication produces cross-sensitization to several other rewards including gambling.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and gambling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Some studies have reported sex differences in cross-sensitization, where early life stress enhanced nicotine sensitization in female rats, yet rendered males more sensitive to further stress (McCormick, Robarts, Gleason, & Kelsey, 2004).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites McCormick, Robarts, Gleason, & Kelsey, 2004 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, for those who do become sensitized, mesolimbic interactions with corticolimbic circuitry focus excessive desire specifically on that target of addiction, resulting in surges of enhanced ‘wanting’ of the addictive target upon encountering related cues or vivid imagery.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“To date, it has been shown in animals that there are genetic differences in the propensity of individual brains to undergo sensitization, and in the functioning of the mesolimbic dopamine system (Dietz, Tapocik, Gaval-Cruz, & Kabbaj, 2005; Phillips, 1997).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Studies of epidemiology and comorbidity demonstrate a large degree of variation within the disordered gambling population”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Taken together these findings suggest the potential existence of a vicious cycle whereby acute or chronic stress enhances ‘wanting’ for drugs and their cues. This in turn may serve to increase stress through financial, social, and other impairments caused by escalating drug use. In addition, attempts at abstinence may precipitate withdrawal, which can promote further anxiety, resulting in enhanced”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between drugs and stress
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast, a recent study examining risky decision-making more broadly, found that cortisol led to a striking increase in risk-taking in men, whereas it had no effect on risk-taking behavior in women (Kluen, Agorastos, Wiedemann, & Schwabe, 2017).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kluen, Agorastos, Wiedemann, & Schwabe, 2017 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sensitization is a complex phenomenon that is influenced by the quantity, timing, and spacing with which a reward or stress is encountered, along with the context in which it is experienced.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“an analysis of various treatment outcomes revealed that 50% of individuals remain abstinent at 6 months post-gambling involvement”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Stinchfield & Winters, 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, most animals and likely humans do show some degree of psychomotor sensitization, although few may still reach the levels sufficient to trigger compulsive drug-seeking and taking.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations > Susceptibility to sensitization
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Gamblers Anonymous, the most popular form of intervention”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry & Armentano, 1999 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Of these options, the cognitive and behavioral treatments, which include problem solving, social skills training, and relapse prevention, seem to provide the most promise (Petry & Armentano, 1999).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petry & Armentano, 1999 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This pervasive sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine system would explain why bouts of craving can occur even years later and why stress remains such a potent trigger of relapse.”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Long-lasting neuroadaptations
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“approximately 29% remain abstinent after one year”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Concluding Remarks
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Stinchfield & Winters, 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“They found that in pathological gamblers, yohimbine produced greater reactivity in the left amygdala and tended to elicit greater subjective stress ratings than in healthy controls (Elman et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cross-sensitization as a framework for comorbidity > Cross-sensitization between gambling and stress
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Elman et al., 2012 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Knowledge of the mechanisms that cause gambling disorder, substance use, and anxiety disorders to coalesce remains limited.
“Yet, our knowledge of the mechanisms that cause these disorders to coalesce remains limited.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Little research has examined the comorbidity between gambling, substance use, and anxiety or stress-related disorders through the incentive sensitization framework.
“However, little research has examined the comorbidity that exists between gambling, substance use, and anxiety or stress-related disorders through this framework.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The complex biopsychosocial mechanisms through which childhood adversity and stressful life events confer risk for these disorders remain largely unknown.
“Though this pathway has been highlighted as a potential shared diathesis, the complex biopsychosocial mechanisms through which childhood adversity and stressful life events confer risk for these disorders remain largely unknown.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Neural and biological pathways through which anxiety disorders may actively increase risk for addictive spectrum disorders remain largely unknown.
“However, neural and biological pathways through which anxiety disorders may actively increase risk for addictive spectrum disorders remain largely unknown.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There is no standard intervention for gambling disorder.
“there is no standard intervention for gambling disorder”
The paper relies on this without support.
Gambling disorder treatments fail to successfully address comorbidity, cultural influences, and socio-demographic differences within the gambling population.
“gambling disorder treatments fail to successfully address comorbidity, cultural influences, and socio-demographic differences within the gambling population”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Individuals with gambling disorder exhibit significantly higher rates of post-traumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) and PTSD compared to the general population.”
From Comprehensive review of chronic stress pathways and the efficacy of behavioral stress reduction programs (BSRPs) in managing diseases. (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“The sensitization of the mesolimbic dopamine pathway, observed in both gambling and substance use disorders, underscores the significant role of stress in relapse [88,89,90].”
From Comprehensive review of chronic stress pathways and the efficacy of behavioral stress reduction programs (BSRPs) in managing diseases. (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
In the citing paper
“Analysis of data from the National Epidemiologic Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions, which included 41,869 participants, revealed that those identified as at-risk gamblers and problem gamblers were more likely to have multiple Axis-I and Axis-II disorders than non-gamblers, with this relationship being stronger in low-stress environments.”
From Comprehensive review of chronic stress pathways and the efficacy of behavioral stress reduction programs (BSRPs) in managing diseases. (2024) · cites this paper as [88]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
“Various studies support that cue reactivity is heightened amongst individuals with problematic gambling and gambling behavior (Hønsi, Mentzoni, Molde, & Pallesen, 2012; Thalemann, Wölfling, & Grüsser, 2007; Wulfert et al., 2009).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > References
“Thalemann R, Wölfling K, & Grüsser SM (2007). Specific cue reactivity on computer game-related cues in excessive gamers.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > Cue sensitivity and sensitization in gambling
“In particular, problem gamblers appear more sensitive to bias attention towards gambling-related cues and to experience craving after exposure to gambling cues than healthy controls (Goudriaan et al., 2014; van Holst et al., 2012).”
§ Cued for risk: Evidence for an incentive sensitization framework to explain the interplay between stress and anxiety, substance abuse, and reward uncertainty in disordered gambling behavior > References
“van Holst RJ, Lemmens JS, Valkenburg PM, Peter J, Veltman DJ, & Goudriaan AE (2012). Attentional bias and disinhibition toward gaming cues are related to problem gaming in male adolescents.”
Citations
Cites
Kessler, R. C. (1994) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1994.03950010008002 · Cited by 12,370 · cited 1×
“(Desai & Potenza, 2008; Kessler et al., 1994).”
Kessler, R. C., Chiu, W. T., Demler, O., & Walters, E. E. (2005) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.617 · Cited by 12,052
A JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY AND EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
Lindemann, L., Jaeschke, G., Michalon, A., Vieira, E., Honer, M., Spooren, W., Porter, R., Hartung, T., Kolczewski, S., Büttelmann, B., et al. (1909) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1909.02550020033007 · Cited by 7,889
The neural basis of drug craving: An incentive-sensitization theory of addiction
Robinson, T. (1993) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/0165-0173(93)90013-p · Cited by 7,346 · cited 4×
“This system is comprised of dopaminergic fibers that project from the ventral tegmental area in the midbrain, to limbic and cortical structures such as the nucleus accumbens, ventral pallidum, amygdala, and prefrontal cortex (Di Chiara & Imperato, 1988; T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993).”
InfluentialDi Chiara, G., & Imperato, A. (1988) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.85.14.5274 · Cited by 4,733 · cited 3×
“This system is comprised of dopaminergic fibers that project from the ventral tegmental area in the midbrain, to limbic and cortical structures such as the nucleus accumbens, ventral pallidum, amygdala, and prefrontal cortex (Di Chiara & Imperato, 1988; T. E. Robinson & Berridge, 1993).”
What is the role of dopamine in reward: hedonic impact, reward learning, or incentive salience?
Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (1998) · Brain Research Reviews · doi:10.1016/s0165-0173(98)00019-8 · Cited by 4,127
Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: a meta-analytic study.
Bar-Haim, Y., Lamy, D., Pergamin, L., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2007) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.1 · Cited by 3,721
Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy
Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293 · Cited by 3,547
Bardo, M. T., & Hammer, R. P. (1991) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/0306-4522(91)90226-e · Cited by 3,229
Hasin, D. S., Stinson, F. S., Ogburn, E., & Grant, B. F. (2007) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.64.7.830 · Cited by 2,908
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- American Psychiatric Association. (2013). American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5®). (A. P. Association, Ed.). Arlington: American Psychiatric Association.
- Balfour, D. J. K. (2015b). The role of mesoaccumbens dopamine in nicotine dependence. Current Topics in Behavioral Neurosciences, 24(Chapter 3), 55–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13482-6_3 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A taxonomy of technology design features that promote potentially addictive online behaviours
Flayelle, M., Brevers, D., King, D. L., Maurage, P., Perales, J. C., & Billieux, J. (2023) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-023-00153-4 · Cited by 195
Positive affect: nature and brain bases of liking and wanting
Nguyen, D. P., Naffziger, E. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2021) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.013 · Cited by 126
Shchaslyvyi, A. Y., Antonenko, S. V., & Telegeev, G. D. (2024) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph21081077 · Cited by 73
Buchanan, T. W., McMullin, S. D., Baxley, C., & Weinstock, J. (2019) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.09.004 · Cited by 66
From sign-tracking to attentional bias: Implications for gambling and substance use disorders
Anselme, P., & Robinson, M. J. F. (2020) · Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.109861 · Cited by 48
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hellberg, S. N., Russell, T. I., & Robinson, M. J. F.
- Affiliations
- Wesleyan University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Robinson, Mike J. F.
- Venue
- Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
- Published
- 2018-10-24
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 737-758
- ISSN
- 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-135X
- PMC
- PMC6482104
- OpenAlex
- W2898505690
- Semantic Scholar
- d496089bd369e83f0139c87dca1afe06c2d1c3ca
- Cited by
- 65
- References
- 288
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10
- FWCI
- 1.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (R03DA045281)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Keywords
- gambling addiction, incentive-sensitization theory, reward uncertainty, stress, anxiety disorders, substance use disorders, mesolimbic dopamine system, cross-sensitization, incentive salience, relapse, comorbidities, slot machines
- MeSH terms
- Anxiety Disorders, Cues, Gambling, Humans, Motivation, Reward, Substance-Related Disorders, Uncertainty
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review